171014P.pdf   11/26/2018  United States  v.  Walter Escobar
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  17-1014
                          and No:  17-1018 etc.
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul   
   [PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Murphy and Colloton, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. This opinion is issued by 
   Chief Judge Smith and Judge Colloton pursuant to 8th Cir. R. 47E. Evidence 
   seized during a search made pursuant to an anticipatory search warrant was 
   admissible under the good-faith exception, as the totality of the 
   circumstances showed the police officers' reliance on the warrant was 
   objectively reasonable; no error in imposing a two-level enhancement 
   against defendant Escobar for possession of a dangerous weapon in 
   connection with a drug offense under Guidelines Sec. 2D1.1(b)(1); no error 
   in denying defendant Rojas-Andrade's motion to withdraw his guilty plea as 
   a misunderstanding of how the guidelines will apply is not a fair and just 
   reason to withdraw a plea; Rojas-Andrasde's below-Guidelines sentence was 
   not substantively unreasonable; no error in denying defendant Jackson's 
   motion to suppress wiretap evidence as the wiretap affidavit established 
   normal investigative techniques had not been successful in exposing the 
   full extent of the drug conspiracy; no error in denying Jackson's motion 
   to sever conspiracy and possession counts; no error in admitting evidence 
   of Jackson's two prior drug convictions as they were not too remote in 
   time and were relevant under Rule 404(b); evidence was sufficient to 
   support Jackson's convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to 
   distribute; Jackson's below-Guidelines sentence was not substantively 
   unreasonable or an abuse of the court's discretion; defendant Garcia did 
   not object to the drug quantity calculation in his PSR or at his 
   sentencing and cannot challenge the quantity in this appeal as it is an 
   admitted fact; no error in admitting recorded out-of-court statements of 
   co-conspirators; evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding 
   that defendant Cruz engaged in a conspiracy to distribute 500 or more 
   grams of methamphetamine; the court did not err in finding that 50 pounds 
   of methamphetamine seized from a co-conspirator were attributable to 
   defendant Cruz.